Assessment

When I hear the word "assessment" I think of it in terms of how it informs instruct for me in
the classroom. I use assessment to help me design lessons for my scholars, not necessarily to
grade them. Since I don't grade them, this is not an issue. I also
don't confuse assessment with accountability, since the two are not the same. Accountability
drives instruction and is usually high stakes. Assessment on the other hand is informative and
instructive to the parties involved. Since we usually don't receive much more than numbers from
the accountablity tests, I find them useless. So assessment is more authentic if it informs
instruction and if it is not high stakes. It is part of scholarship. Scholarship is making
one's work public, engaging in peer review, and passing it on. First the scholar must make hir
work public and I like the web for this. Once it is public, then other scholars may engage in
reviewing it in what is deemed peer review. After revisions and such, the original scholar
passes it on for others to read and advance.

Why use the Internet in the classroom at all? One answer is simple. It provides a better
way for us to assess our scholars. The work each scholar constructs is on the web in hir
own webfolio. The webfolio is
an electronic version of the portfolio. The webfolio, though, is a collection of all of the
scholar's work and it is available to more people than the hard copy of the portfolio. By
digitizing the work we can make it more available to more people than we can with the
printed version. The webfolio, if started early can be a record, of the scholar's
development over a lifetime, let us say starting as early as elementary school. So as
teachers get new students, the teacher can peruse the scholar's webfolio to determine
instruction. Employers can gain valuable insight about a future employee through a
webfolio. Since the webfolio is accessible to all on the web, then parents, relatives,
peers, other teachers, administrators, pre-service teachers, employers, college and
graduate school admissions, and anyone else can make an authentic assessment of said
scholar.

Abstract:
The Research Assessment Exercises (REAs) in hugely expanded universities in Britain and
Hong Kong attempt mammoth scale ratings of "quality of research." If peer review on that
scale is feasible for "quality of research," is it less so for "quality of teaching"? The
lessons of the Hong Kong Teaching and Learning Quality Process Reviews (TLQPRs), of recent
studies on the influence of grade expectation and workload on student ratings, of attempts
to employ agency theory both to improve teaching quality and raise student ratings, and of
institutional attempts to refine the peer review process, all suggest that we can "put
teaching on the same footing as research" and include professional regard for teaching
content and objectives, as well as student ratings of effectiveness and personality appeal,
in the process.

Once the webfolio has been begun and the work is public, the process of peer review, the second tenet of
scholarship can begin. Developing good peer review skills is taught in the class and the
scholars learn about the use of rubrics. As the work is created, rubrics are designed so
the writer and the reader are aware of the criteria of each assignment. The rubric becomes
the criteria by which the scholar created the work and it must therefore be the criteria by
which the reader assesses it. Connecting expectations with assessment makes for better
work and for an understanding between scholar and evaluator. That doesn't mean the reader
can't make suggestions outside the rubric, but assessment shouldn't be made outside
the rubric since the scholar wasn't using that idea either by choice or by not thinking of
it. It would fall into the area of discovery and certainly cna be added and included in
further rubric development. The suggestion by the reader may cause the scholar to alter the
rubric and add that new idea. But what is key here is that the scholar has explained what
s/he will do as stated in the rubric and the reader now has the guidelines by which to
evaluate the piece. Rubric building is a collaborative effort among teacher, scholar, and
other concerned mentors and peers. If the writer and reader are not in synch on this matter
then assessment is useless and will only add to the frustration of the scholar. We have
seen tests given to young scholars which test something for which they have not yet had
instruction and as a result they are embarassed, chastised, and called stupid. The method
I use of the rubric eliminates any confusion between writer and reader. In fact, this form
of assessment provides for positive interactivity between writer and reader. I have always
been under the impression that assessment was to inform instruction. The current forms of
assessment are more like business, methods of accountability and puninishment. Rarely do
they inform instruction, except to have teachers teach more to the test than to the
scholar. Authentic assessment makes more pedagogical sense for the classroom.

By publishing on the web, we provide greater access to information for our scholars,
we can make their work public, we can engage them in peer review, we can let them become
information providers, and we can develop that national test by practicing authentic
assessment. The web opens up our schools to the public thereby allowing us to actually
practice that oftentimes used expression: "It takes a village to raise a child." In this
case we are speaking about the global wired village of netizens. It provides for local
control and practices to be made known to the scholars as well as providing access to
diverse points of view. The use of the web in our schools will return to the purpose of
the school to the scholar and hir education.

Why limit one's defense of one's work at the end of an academic
career, the PhD, to a few when it can begin in fifth grade for all. The webfolio grows with
the scholar and can be used by all to better prepapre the scholar for the next level based
on where that scholar is at each step.

In 1998 I was fortunate to become part of the first cohort of Carnegie Academy for the
Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (CASTL), that supported me in my efforts to
explore matters of authentic assessment in pure scholarly style. My research helped me fine tune my practice by
providing me time and guidance in pursuing the theories of assessment. I had collected the
data from the current scholars in
CyberEnglish. the next step for me was to research what others had done in assessment and
see how that work would apply to my work with my scholars on the Internet. My work at
Carnegie became practical theory.